COMPUTER-GENERATED CORRESPONDENCE FOR PATIENTS ATTENDING AN OPEN-ACCESS CHEST PAIN CLINIC

Aim: To determine whether general practitioners (GPs) prefer structure d computer-generated or standard dictated outpatient clinic letters. D esign: Questionnaire survey of all GPs referring patients to an open-a ccess chest pain clinic at a district general hospital in London. The GPs were asked to compare three twinned examples of structured compute r-generated and unstructured dictated letters. Results: Of 93 responde nts (response rate 77.5%), 75 (80.6%) preferred the computer-generated letter and 16 (17.2%) preferred the dictated letter (p<0.0005). The p referred features of the computer-generated letter were its clear pres entation, subheadings, and concise information. The computer-generated letter scored significantly higher than the dictated letter: for clar ity, mean 8.2 vs 6.5 (p<0.0005); content, mean 8.5 vs 6.9 (p<0.0005); and readability, mean 8.2 vs 6.8 (p<0.0005). The GPs in the survey con sidered a mean delay of 3.4 days to be acceptable for receiving the le tter from the chest pain clinic. Conclusion: GPs prefer structured com puter-generated letters to unstructured dictated letters for patients referred to an open-access chest pain clinic. Computer-generated corre spondence allows rapid feedback of information to the referring CP, on e of the key requirements of open-access clinics.